[NewMusic] More anti-carbon floop-print poopoganda

[Phillip Greenlief]

Again, I seem to agree with Matthew.
   
  Integrity, in the existentialist tradition, is as subjective as it gets because each individual creates their own sense of integrity based on a system of ethics and morals that said individual creates based on their own unique experience of the world. In short, it doesn't get any more subjective....
   
  As an educator, it's sometimes easy to say, "well, I'm helping kids, what's wrong in that?" But I work for two VERY different schools, and both of those schools raise questions in this regard.
   
  On one hand, I teach at Oakland School for the Arts, a fine little school that is part public school, part private charter. Up until recently, we had a slough of directors that were shady (it's rumored that the last director bilked big money from the budget to pay off some of his personal debt). And, the school was founded by Jerry Brown, who I have enormous philosophical issues with!  And yet, there I am taking their money. The way I see it is that I can do more good by being there (and offering the kids what I think is quality education), than sitting at home criticizing the system.  And, I really enjoy working with the students that go there; we seem to have a great working relationship.
   
  On the other hand, I teach at SF Waldorf HS, a private school with what seems to be a lot of money (well, they spend a lot, but they don't spend a lot on me!). In addiition to a paycheck, I get a studio to practice, compose, rehearse and record in whenever I want (on off hours). They give me a laptop with protools and four really great microphones and access to other related equipment. But where is the money coming from, and what students are being served at this school? The school is populated with children who have RICH parents (it costs something like 26K a year to send your kid there...more than what it costs at most universities), and who knows where their money comes from (???!!!!!!). When I originally started there, I had big concerns about working with privileged kids. I've been an educator for 20 years now, and up until now I've always worked at schools in economically depressed neighborhoods. So I wondered what it would be like and whether or not I could
 overcome some of my prejudices about serving people who come from big money.  
   
  So far so good. What I have come to realize is that all young people need access to quality education regardless of their background (duh!). AND, I really like working with both groups of kids, I truly love my students and care about them a lot.
   
  So, when I read someone's words that say, "you have to sell little pieces of your soul in order to make a paycheck" (OK, I've slightly misquoted Alicia here...), I wonder if that's true. I wonder if I can even discern at this point whether or not I'm selling out by being an educator. I do know that if I am selling out, I'm doing it rather cheaply...
   
  It seems that I have struck (Matthew's) balance, but who knows if others would view it the same way? It is clear, however, that existential wholeness/integrity or whatever you want to call it is absolutely subjective and it's up to us to stay conscious in this struggle and live the best life we can.
   
  PG
   
  Matthew Goodheart <matthew at matthewgoodheart.com> wrote:
  > Alicia wrote:
> either you sell your soul to the machine little piece by piece, day 
> by day, or you try
> to retain some integrity, which forces you to live on an extreme 
> fringe
> that may warp you and is not always necessarily good for your 
> objectives
> either.
>
> I'm not saying I have an answer, just pointing out that there doesn't
> seem to be a convenient(tm) way to exist with any integrity in 
> America.


I'm not sure that's how I see it. To begin with, this proposes that 
integrity is some kind of absolute, measurable thing, and a reasonable 
argument could be made that it's a pretty subjective measurement (such 
as Mother Theresa's acts vs. her personality. . . apparently 
personally she was a tyrant). Secondly, it implies that "fringing" 
equals moral integrity, which I think is a particularly specious 
cultural meme (and one that lines the pockets of Murdoch as well, 
actually.)

Secondly, the lack of the ability to exist in some kind of absolute 
moral state is hardly particularly American, I think it's rather an 
essential nature of the human condition; there is always some systemic 
evil/good paradox; doesn't matter if it's American, the Roman Empire, 
fuedalism, the Khwe bushmen, or whatever. We tend to see our own 
modern problems as the paramount evil, but frankly I'd rather have to 
deal with trying to survive in the face of corporatism run amok than 
theocratic absolutism or tribal honor codes.

Integrity, it seems to me, rather falls on how one strikes their 
balance. One cannot exist without participating in systems which 
create simultaneous positive and negative results.

mg